User talk:Ppisa

Welcome!

Hello, Ppisa, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Speedy deletion nomination of CHROMuLAN


A tag has been placed on CHROMuLAN, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of CHROMuLAN and leave a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Syrthiss (talk) 12:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Some supporting arguments in CHROMuLAN talk page listed. Ppisa (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2010 (CET)

The page has been deleted without any reply to the content on the talk page.

This software exists for relatively long time and has been used by more people. Many of them find it and used unrelated to PiKRON products. Google scholar returns many well cited articles mentioning this software. Because Wikipedia frequently provides features matrices and other information helping to find reasonable software for some tasks, I think, that it would worth to document this work there. There are other Chromatography softwares documented, many of them fully proprietary, very expensive, some open source.

I have understood Wikipedia as a source of helpfull information to others. And I believe, that providing CHROMuLAN helped more people and has some potential to help others.

I agree, that it would be better if somebody from the users started the article. But most of them are happy, that they can use software and do not care too much for feedback or such time investment.

If you disagree with my point of view and think that there are other more important goals for Wikipedia, send me reasonable description and delete the article. If you do not like the text but agree, that CHROMuLAN anchor worth to stay there, delete text, which you consider as abundant.

As for the text itself, it has been in similar form on wikipedia for some years but then it has been marked as not linked with other pages. But there has not been category for chromatography software at that time and I did not want to pollute some other theoretical Chromatography articles by references to CHROMuLAN. So I did not attempt to argue against deletion. But I have found recently, that there has been added more Chromatography software related pages from that time and that CHROMuLAN fits into Wikipedia provided software matrix.

Can somebody provide real reply and sugestions?

CHROMuLAN was one of the first full chromatography software systems which has been released under open-source (GPL) license and is in use for many years. It served in well known departments doing cancer and HIV drugs research etc. So I think, that years of work on software which has been provided for free deserve at least minute to reply why it does not deserve to be listed between available chromatography software.

Ppisa (talk) 16:00, 11 August 2010 (CET)


 * Specifically, I nominated the article because it seemed to exist solely to promote CHROMuLAN (which I'm afraid to say seems to be consistent with your statements here). It talked about its strengths and didn't provide any sources except pages of unknown pedigree (sourceforge and CHROMuLAN's own page).  If you could show how it is notable with reliable sources to the standards suggested in Software notability (an essay, not an actual guideline or policy) or our general notability guidelines, it is possible that the article could be included in the encyclopedia. Syrthiss (talk) 14:08, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * And to be clear, I only nominated it for deletion. I did not delete the article myself. Syrthiss (talk) 14:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Following your query on my talk page I have looked back at the deleted article. I admit it is not as blatantly promotional as I at first thought, though there is some promotional language there. I was, in fact, going to undelete the article for that reason, but before doing so I looked further, and found that the text is either identical to or nearly identical to the text of http://www.chromulan.org/. Unless you can show evidence that this is not a copyright infringement the article will have to stay deleted. If you can do that I will be willing to undelete it, though I cannot promise it won't be deleted again, either for the same reason or for other reasons, such as not satisfying the notability guidelines. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:46, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reply. I am connected to the project and I unveil that by using my real SF.net name on Wikipedia. I did not tried or want to pretend something else. But I think that project deserves at least minimal stub on Wikipedia when there are matrices with Chromatography systems. That was reason I have tried to recreate article which has been deleted years ago for reason that there has not been page poining to link it. The CHROMuLAN mainly serves to its users without big fame but you can find quite long list of research articles on Google Scholar where CHROMuLAN is listed between used equipment. As for the logo and texts and other things related to CHROMuLAN on SF.net and CHROMuLAN.org, all can be considered published under GPL license (as is in the declared in sources) or (for documentation) under GFDL, CC-BY-SA or any other reasonable license. Doc. Jindrich Jidrich and I are authors of the all texts and I thing that even original Wikipedia page has been edited or created by J. Jindrich. If you think, that information is close to promotional, I would be much more happy if you delete or edit offending text than whole article. Ppisa (talk) 16:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)


 * You have deleted all traces of provided fact and discussion on your personal page without any further communication even that I replied quickly to your previos questions. Is there some address where I can send PDF document with list of more than 120 worldwide indexed research papers referencing CHROMuLAN and or instruments controlled by it. Some of them have been published in journals on the top of scientits citation index range: Amino Acids, Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry, Biopolymers. It is really sad that you are proud of beeing knight of content removal and bagatelize years of others work wich provides freely available tools in area where high prices and close proprietary tools are common. You strive to find time for such persecution in minutes and then you are not able to find some time for months to take responsibility for your actions and their discussion and read response to the questions you state. Ppisa (talk) 16:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * All of my work on Wikipedia is done in good faith, in a sincere attempt to improve the encyclopaedia. You may disagree with me about particular decisions I make, and if so you are welcome to indicate the fact in a civil way. I will then be willing to consider your opinions and respond to them if it seems appropriate to do so. However, suggesting that I am "proud of beeing knight of content removal", and accusing me of "persecution" are not constructive, and I do not have anything to say in answer to them. As for "bagatelize", I have never before come across the word and do not know what it means. I did, as you will see above, answer your query relating to the deletion of the article. You then posted another message, expressing your opinions about the article, but not specifically relating to my involvement, and not specifically requesting a reply from me. I had nothing more to contribute on the subject, so I made no further comment. You seem now to think that I had some sort of obligation to make such a further comment, and that throwing accusations of bad faith at me is the way to get me to do so. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:08, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I expected, that if you have stepped up to judge the article case, that you would finish what you have started or point me to some else direction. At least, it was my expectation based on experience from other projects. But I have found that you have only cleaned all traces of unfinished case on your page. I did not want to turn to more project related people and waste their time when one has taken the case. There is temporary location for list of articles (I am not happy to publish it this way before asking of authors anyway, but that means a weeks of intensive communication. I am prepared for that, but would like to finish other things related to CHROMuLAN which would be usesfull for even for these people, before that). But generally I resign and take the fact, that the case has lead to dead end without initiating request for resolution. I consider your credit and judgment to declare non-usesfullness of article to Wikipedia. Please, delete the CHROMuLAN page with all history to not to misslead people and search engines. I see this as highly unfortunate for our effort and contribution to the open chromatography systems area, if people find "doesn't assert importance" and "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion" instead of link to sources and homepage. I personally feel such state as much more harmfull than calling names between people. I would follow your resolution about our project and would not create CHROMuLAN page again. The option should be left for other but probability of others contribution is not so high. On the other hand, we have found references to CHROMuLAN in some list of chemistry software with surprise in past, so may it be that somebody else contributes. (bagatelize (downplay) - my mistake, I thought that it is international). Generally I understand, that it is big amount of work to keep Wikipedia usesfull and I hope that I am open enough to work on pure facts basis and follow the sense of maximal usesfullness above particular project profit but I am quite uncomfortable with timing and way of actions and communication in this case. Ppisa (talk) 16:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Nobody should be able to see any of the deleted pages here on Wikipedia, except for the administrators. When I do a google search for CHROMuLAN or chromulan I get no hits (at least for the first few pages, I stopped looking after that) that show the 'doesn't assert importance' and G11 notifiers. Am I perhaps reading your statement incorrectly? Not to speak for James, but the burden is not on Wikipedia admins to guide users on how to create articles. We are volunteers, and the most active administrators have quite a workload already. Also, I believe that the conversations on James page were archived by a bot as part of the normal function of his page to keep it from becoming unmanageably huge...not through any malicious intent to 'hide your conversation'. Regards, Syrthiss (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reply, but if you go to table of the "Chromatography software" and follow the link, the red-box allert appears. This is whole unfortunate and lost case and time.
 * Ah, easily solved then. I pruned the table at that article to remove all the software with no Wikipedia articles. Syrthiss (talk) 17:11, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought that Wikipedia is a place to collaborate on collecting information. I have found the list very interresting, tested and compiled some pointed open source software and considered to join my effort with them. The valuable information is now lost. You probably act according to some rules but attempt to contribute is lost of the time for naive open minded people. Ppisa (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm unclear on what you are saying here. We have clear guidelines for what is notable and worthy of inclusion, and only notable subjects should be included in the 'list' articles.  I addressed your concern that your project was unfairly labeled by removing the references to it, only to be upbraided as 'naive' and 'open minded' (the last is oddly usually a positive thing in English, but that doesn't appear how you intended it).  Considering there are other venues for everyone to share their open concept software without regard to notability, I encourage you to restrict your contributions to them.  Syrthiss (talk) 13:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Due to an edit conflict I find that Syrthiss has already covered a couple of the points in the following comments, but I may as well post them anyway, now that I have written them.
 * Presumably "But I have found that you have only cleaned all traces of unfinished case on your page" refers to the fact that previous messages about this are no linger on my talk page. This is because threads on my user talk page which have not been edited for a week are automatically archived. I was reluctant to introduce such automatic archiving, but I found that I was getting so many talk page messages that it was becoming quite unmanageable. I have had over 100 messages in the last six days, and as few months ago I was getting messages at a rate of about 100 every two days. There have been over 3000 edits since the start of 2010. It is essential to remove old messages, even though this will inevitably occasionally cause difficulties. The old messages have not been lost, but are still available on archive pages linked from the "Archive" box near the top right hand corner of my talk page. The earliest archive is no 1, and at present the latest one is no 20.
 * I agree that it is not particularly helpful for people to find "doesn't assert importance" and "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion" on searching for information, but the fact remains that the last version of the article was unambiguous promotion, which is against Wikipedia policy, and that was why I deleted it, and it also appears to be a copyright infringement, which is why it has remained deleted. If notability can be demonstrated, and an article written from a non-promotional perspective, then there should be no problem in having such an article. However, whether you are the right person to write it is another matter. It is clear that you have a conflict of interest, and it is therefore quite possible that you are not the best person to write a non-promotional article on the subject: very often users who have a close personal involvement in a subject cannot see that they are writing in a promotional way, even if they sincerely intend to do so. I do not know how far the software satisfies Wikipedia's notability criteria. My own (admittedly brief) searches have revealed many references to it, but none of what I have seen has passed both the tests of being substantial coverage and of being independent sources. The pdf file you provided certainly shows a very impressive list of mentions, numerically far more than is needed, but unfortunately just a list of titles does not tell me anything about how significant the mentions are. For example, if a paper merely acknowledges use of the software in a piece of research then it does very little to suggest satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines.
 * As I have written, these are only confirmation of the project usage, so no notability according to your actual description. The conference papers and thesis about project goals, internals and related technologies are all co-authored by me, so there is COI and as it is written, the most strict interpretation of COI disallows me to write article. As for the promotional language, I have asked for help once and then again "If you think, that information is close to promotional, I would be much more happy if you delete or edit offending text than whole article." and after my attempts to honestly reply questions and your "I admit it is not as blatantly promotional as I at first thought, though there is some promotional language there. I was, in fact, going to undelete the article for that reason, but ...", I feel like in cat and mouse play. Ppisa (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Finally, I should like to remind you that, like almost everyone working for Wikipedia, I am a volunteer. Every time I have answered queries or comments from you I have given up my own time to try to help you. I have tried to explain how your queries relate to Wikipedia policies and guidelines. I did not unilaterally write those policies and guidelines, but I make a sincere attempt to implement them, even when I personally disagree with them. I have answered your queries at considerably greater length than many administrators would have done. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:23, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think, that I understand what it means to contribute time into open source projects and providing help to others. May it be, I have sometimes problems to understand others actions but I believe that I have done more good than evil in general and really, I have not gained to be much rich for a years of my work which is used over the world even in critical control applications so I am not sure if your emphasing of your time above mine is so fair after my lose in the attempt, time and even in belief that Wikipedia as a shared platform for incremental building of information base after Syrthiss action. Ppisa (talk) 21:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the detailed answer James, and sorry for the ec's. Syrthiss (talk) 17:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Good. Nearly ten years have passed. And no one else created this page because it is a very specific software. Will you ensure that the page to be restored, for to update or correct? Than you. Want (talk) 13:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)


 * No, because it certainly infringed Wikipedia's copyright policy, and very likely also copyright law. You are perfectly free to create a new draft article on the subject, though I wouldn't encourage you to do so, as my searches for information about CHROMuLAN have convinced me that it does not satisfy the notability guidelines, which means that any article about it is likely to be deleted. Syrthiss has not edited for over a year, and before that had made only very rare and sporadic edits since June 2013, so he or she is not very likely to respond to your ping. Also, even if they do so, they won't be able to respond to your request for the page to be restored, as they are no longer an administrator. Purely as a matter of interest, how did you find your way to this rather obscure discussion from over eight and a half years ago? (Incidentally, I think it is virtually certain that this is a personal record by a very large margin for the time that has elapsed between my taking some action and someone asking me about it.) JamesBWatson (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * If the page does not exist, I cannot judge its content. CHROMuLAN is open source alternative against commercial apps, which is may be freely integrated into laboratory chromatography devices. I know than is used for biochemical reasearche of cancer medicaments on UOCHB, and that devices with it are use in Omicron Biochemicals, Inc. too. There is a page on the wiki about similar software OpenChrom, but unlike this, may be CHROMuLAN used to control chromatography devices. So I don't know why there couldn't be a page on Wikipedia that would have written more about this. I know Mr. Pisa personally and recently he mention to me, that how this page was canceled years ago. So I wanted to look at the result. From discussion I understand: "Sorry, but it happened". It's all. But I think that it's a bad attitude. Mr. Pisa is engeneer and developer the open-source, not a proffesional bureaucrat of Wikipedia. If was the page deleted page, cannot be repaired. -- Want (talk) 13:03, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I have invested quite considerable amount of my personal, unpaid time to CHROMuLAN over this Christmas again (initial support for WIN64, MacOS and mostly working GNU/Linux versionn after ten years of Christmas "spare" time commits) and stumbled over your claims again. I declare that your saying infringed .. very likely also copyright law is a lie and you know that (I have replied to your Unless you can show evidence that this is not a copyright infringement the article will have to stay deleted. If you can do that I will be willing to undelete it, though I cannot promise it won't be deleted again). Original article text has been written by somebody else and was short (non copyrightable), I have extended it by text from pages to which I have moral and even company soley owner rights and even I has been author. The similar text is published on GPLed projects pages. So if this is backing of your claims which support your actions then they are void from beginning. I am not sure how it is with Wikipedia copyright laws, I am convinced by your actions that they are somehow twisted. As for the notability, yes CHROMuLAN is effort of poor enthusiasts, professor Jindrich and me to provide something to others and no money has been available for paying publishing houses, Google and others to make it a fame. On the other hand I offered ZIP archive with articles mentioning project and it has grown by time to 129 MB zip of PDFs, text files with list of these and other articles citations have about 800 lines and project is referenced in many open chemistry software lists, it is listed as one of eight software packages at https://www.canadapeptide.com/resources/tools/software.html (by the way polypeptides, ale building blocks for RNA which is our actual hope to build vaccines and help people). The three new HPLC systems delivered with my help to https://www.uochb.cz/ last year use CHROMuLAN same as systems in service there for may it be 28 years. Again this is organization conributing to invent drugs to help wit cancer etc... Others use CHROMUaLAN for testing of consitution of plants around the world to seek for remendies. So all these consider project usable and hepfull. So if I see again your blatant calaims about blatant nature of the article then I really want you to pass resolution of the case to somebody neutral. Because you are biassed and your claims and actions in this and older replies prove themselves to be contadictory. No argumets hear no attempt to really discuss from your side, only claims. I have been polite at the start, considered you to be real contributor with long history etc... But you have taught me that waiting for cooperative actions from side of some peoples does not work. Proudly by real name Ppisa - Pavel Pisa (talk) 00:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)